by Alex Christoforou, The Duran:
The NYT “Russia Papadopoulos Bombshell” story was a complete propaganda misfire.
The New York Times was hard at work last week, providing some cover for the Deep State and Mueller special counsel, by trying to piece together an alternative narrative to justify the ridiculous Trump-Russia collusion investigation.
Now that the completely unverified and fictitious “Trump dosser” has been revealed to be the sole source of the entire special counsel investigation, and the document used by Obama to spy on a presidential candidate in order to help Hillary Clinton win the US elections, the NYT is grasping at any straws that can be used to give ancillary support to the fake news that Trump and Putin colluded to win the White House.
Yesterday The Duran reported on the NYT’s attempt to distance the Russiagate investigation from the discredited Trump Dossier by relying on low level staffer, George Papadopoulos’s inherent unreliability as a witness.
Even more to the point, the NYT’s timeline of events used to tie Papadopoulos to “high up” Russian officials and Donald Trump falls apart with a bit of logic and scrutiny.
The drunken bragging of a twenty eight year old man in a London bar presumably with attractive young women present is not usually considered grounds to initiate a top secret investigation resulting in the secret surveillance of people against whom no other evidence of wrongdoing exists.
The known timeline of the Russiagate inquiry anyway strongly argues against this claim.
The DNC emails were published by Wikileaks on 22nd July 2016. The FBI launched the Russiagate inquiry in late July 2016, probably after the DNC emails were published.
This was however after the FBI had interviewed Christopher Steele, the compiler of the Trump Dossier, in early July 2016. The Trump Dossier’s first two entries are dated 20th June 2016 and 19th July 2016 – ie. before publication of the DNC emails – and it is likely that before the FBI launched the Russiagate inquiry in late July 2016 it had seen them.
The New York Times says that the FBI received the information about Papadopoulos’s bragging in front of the Australian High Commissioner after the DNC emails were published. However the FBI did not actually interview Papadopoulos until 27th January 2017.
What seems to have happened is that after the Russiagate inquiry was launched the FBI went through all the information it received which might touch on the inquiry. At some point the Australian High Commissioner’s report about Papadopoulos’s bragging in May 2016 in the London bar came up and a decision was taken to interview him.
However – contrary to what the New York Times says – the FBI cannot have accorded this any great importance since though the Russiagate inquiry was launched at the end of July 2016 the FBI did not interview Papadopoulos until 27th January 2017 ie. six months later.
That makes it all but inconceivable that it was – as the New York Times claims – the report from Australia about what Papadopoulos said in the presence of the Australian High Commissioner in the London bar rather than the Trump Dossier which triggered the Russiagate inquiry.
As it happens the rest of the New York Times article, though outlining at fantastic length the nature of Papadopoulos’s Russian contacts provides no evidence of collusion illegal or otherwise between the Russians, Papadopoulos or anyone else in the Trump campaign.
Adding more weight to The Duran’s analysis and debunking of the NYT’s poor attempt to draw attention away from the highly flawed dossier, was Conservative Treehouse’s thorough break down of the NYT’s Papadopoulos piece (courtesy of The Gateway Pundit)…
1) Um Maggie, [@maggieNYT ] hate to undercut your *explosive story* on origin of Russia Probe. But George Papadopoulos talking in May 2016, is likely about this *open and public information* from April 2016. https://t.co/t9qtqDoLdQ
— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) December 30, 2017
Read More @ TheDuran.com